In a previous post I talked about why I’ve stayed in testing. Here I want to be a little more concise around the idea of how you might frame testing beyond how it is normally described, particularly if you want to get someone excited about testing as a career choice.
Category: Career
Test Interview Technocracy
I’ve focused on the danger of the technocracy before, which is where we turn testing into a programming problem. This has, in many cases, infused the interview process for test specialists as well. And yet automation is important! There’s no doubt that automation is a scaling factor and a way to leverage humans better. So that does bring up an interesting dynamic when you interview test specialists but where you hope to have some sort of programmatic focus.
Hire Your Test Specialists First
I see a lot of companies who have trouble getting started with quality assurance and test positions. They do a lot of interviewing but make a lot of mistakes when bringing in those crucial first people that will let them scale for the future. These companies look for things like “ability to write test cases” or “knowledge of automation.” They don’t look for people who have specialized in testing. But what does that even mean?
Should We Hire Specialist Testers?
I previously talked about some heuristics for hiring test specialists. There was an assumption in that post that you do, in fact, want to hire specialist testers. But, of course, that is just an assumption. Perhaps you don’t. And before you say “But of course we do!”, let’s talk about this a little bit. Continue reading Should We Hire Specialist Testers?
Heuristics for Hiring Specialist Testers
I’ve talked quite a bit about the interview process for testers. Here I’ll try to distill some of that material around my experiences with hiring test specialists. By this term, I mean exactly what it sounds like: people who have chosen to specialize in the discipline of testing. Continue reading Heuristics for Hiring Specialist Testers
Why Have You Stayed in Testing?
I get asked this a lot. I’ve been doing some form of testing since the early 1990s and while my initial opportunities were provided by chance, my career was one of choice. Rather than say why I stay in testing, I’ll frame this around some questions and answers that may give some insight of how testing has allowed me to answer certain questions in a career-relevant way. Continue reading Why Have You Stayed in Testing?
Finding the Specialist Tester
I’ve talked about interviewing testers before and I’ve talked specifically about hiring test specialists. Here I’m going to try to be a bit more concise, yet also a bit more expansive, about exactly what I think it means to look for specialist testers. Continue reading Finding the Specialist Tester
The Blogging Imperative
I periodically find myself questioning the extent to which it makes sense to blog. I find it’s healthy to go through these periods of reflection and introspection. I often find it’s even healthier to expose these thoughts to others. Continue reading The Blogging Imperative
Interviewing a Tester as Developer
There is still so much wrong with how testers — even those who will write automation — are interviewed. I talked about this already regarding how technical test interviews are broken and about interviewing technical testers more broadly. Is there really more to say? I think so; let’s see if you agree. Continue reading Interviewing a Tester as Developer
Technical Test Interviews are Broken
Here I’m not speaking to the people who are interviewing for roles in automation. I’m speaking to the people hiring them. The interview process is entirely broken in so many places. According to Eric Elliot, code-based interviews have always been broken. And he’s probably right. Sahat Yalkabov said something similar. He’s probably right too. But here I’m focusing on the companies and hiring managers that are exacerbating the technocrat problem. So let’s talk about this. Continue reading Technical Test Interviews are Broken
The Danger of the Muddy Thinker
I talked before about tradition and dogma and not too long ago, on LinkedIn, I saw someone post yet another one of those bits of dogma in our industry without considering the context. The discussion that ensued showcased exactly the problem with simply regurgitating the “received wisdom” of others. So let’s talk about this. Continue reading The Danger of the Muddy Thinker
My Future in Testing
I had two major series of thematic posts that I tried out this year: Modern Testing and Indefinito. The former was eminently focused on the tactical and the latter more on the strategic and perhaps even philosophical. In some ways these provided my focus as I find myself on the doorstep of 2017. Continue reading My Future in Testing
Reframing Test Interviews with Gamification
In our testing industry we’ve borrowed ideas from the physics realm to provide ourselves some glib phrases. For example, you’ll hear about “Schrödinger tests” and “Heisenbugs.” It’s all in good fun but, in fact, the way that physics developed over time certainly has a great deal of corollaries with our testing discipline. I already wasted people’s precious time talking about what particle physics can teach us about testing. But now I’m going to double down on that, broaden the scope a bit, and look at a wider swath of physics. Continue reading Reframing Test Interviews with Gamification
The Danger of the Technocrat Tester
If being completely accurate, I would have to title this post something like “The Danger of the Companies that Frame Testing as a Technocratic Discipline and Hire Testers Who Reinforce This View”. But that’s a really cumbersome title to write! However, I believe that the technocrat tester is a big problem in our industry and many companies are reinforcing this problem. So let’s talk about this.
Continue reading The Danger of the Technocrat TesterWhy Test Engineers Should Learn Geb and Spock
Awhile back I talked about why test engineers should learn Groovy. Here I’ll focus on two specific tools in this ecosystem: Geb and Spock.
Continue reading Why Test Engineers Should Learn Geb and SpockBeing (and Hiring) A Test Specialist
I’ve previously talked about being a generalist with specialist tendencies. I’ve said I’ve generalized in just about everything but I’ve tried to specialize in quality assurance and testing as disciplines. But what does that actually mean? Let’s talk about that.
Continue reading Being (and Hiring) A Test SpecialistTester Specialist, Technology Generalist
A way back I talked about testing focusing on its roots as a technical discipline. I’ve also talked about how companies should interview testers as testers and, most recently, a bit about being generalists with some areas of specialization. I often hear, usually from hiring managers, that what I talk about makes it very hard to hire testers in light of modern day realities. So let’s talk about that.
Continue reading Tester Specialist, Technology GeneralistTesters as Generalists with Specialist Tendencies
Previously I had talked about valuing the “modern” tester as well as a possible defocusing of test practices. What a lot of these kinds of discussions swirl around is how much, and to what extent, testers are generalists or specialists. So let’s talk about that a bit.
Continue reading Testers as Generalists with Specialist TendenciesLooking For and Valuing the Modern Tester
The test discipline is an interesting spot right now which is where some testers are considered “too technical” and the fear is they don’t want to do the actual testing. On the other hand, some testers aren’t considered “technical enough” and thus the fear is that they put too much emphasis on the actual testing and not on the tooling around the testing. This should be a false dichotomy.
Continue reading Looking For and Valuing the Modern TesterThe Danger of the Certified Tester
Here I argue against people, particularly certain companies, that seem to think it matters overly much if their test employees hold a certification, such as the CSTE.
Continue reading The Danger of the Certified Tester